Doing the Law

[sandy whitelinger]

Hi Sandy, good question. I believe the purpose of "doing" the Law is to be saved when we are judged.

I don't. I beleive the "doing" of the Law is the righteousness that is bestowed upon someone.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Hi Sandy, for there to be "doers"--there are those who choose not to "do". Therefore, just why did GOD give the "laws"? Judgments?

I believe that Romans teaches that God gave the Law in order to define sin and thereby the excuse of, "I never knew," could not be employed.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

So you figure that Gentiles refuse to eat catfish, put paddles on the end of their spears or go to see the preist when they have leprosy of other surch obscure things in order to fulfill the Law?

No. You asked about what Paul meant. Paul was looking at a community of Jews in the Jesus sect who objected to the idea of gentiles following Jesus without holding the law (especially being circumcised). He sought to show that those who have the law, the Jews, are not by made better simply by the fact that they know/hear the law. Only doing it matters. That is the entire point of the distinction between doers and hearers. Hearers are Jews, the keepers of the law. But they will be judged by their actions just like anybody else. Which is why doing the law is what matters.

 

[Pegg]

But isn’t there laws in these cities and countries that ban murder, rape, stealing, etc.? If so, some of these people may be obeying the law of the land rather than the law written on their hearts. I do not know of any country that does not have any laws at all. The laws of Judaism just aren’t religious laws, they are also national laws.

the laws of many nations are based on Gods righteousness. I dont think you'll find any nation of people who dont have laws against murder, rape, stealing etc

these are all things we 'know' to be wrong

thats why even non religious nations uphold such laws. They are adhering to Gods righteousness

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown
Hi Sandy, good question. I believe the purpose of "doing" the Law is to be saved when we are judged.

I don't. I beleive the "doing" of the Law is the righteousness that is bestowed upon someone.

Hi Sandy, True, the law(Decalogue) is holy, Just, good, and spiritual(Rom.7:12-14); but it is, also (Rom.8:4)seen and understood---"That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."
That is why Rom. 3:20-21 has shown "the why."
"Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;"

Paul has shown that One is(all are) rightly condemned to death----Knowledge of what is sinful is known.
It is as Ken stated, when one stands before the White Throne on judgment day one's records will be opened and the "hearers" and the "doers" of the Law will be judged by their abiding/adhering to to the standards of the Law.
Mind you, however, that the saving Grace is meted out in Mercy to those who have confessed their sins---Repented of them and fully submitted their wills to the WILL OF THE FATHER.

 

[sincerly]

Originally Posted by roger1440
But isn’t there laws in these cities and countries that ban murder, rape, stealing, etc.? If so, some of these people may be obeying the law of the land rather than the law written on their hearts. I do not know of any country that does not have any laws at all. The laws of Judaism just aren’t religious laws, they are also national laws.

the laws of many nations are based on Gods righteousness. I dont think you'll find any nation of people who dont have laws against murder, rape, stealing etc

these are all things we 'know' to be wrong

thats why even non religious nations uphold such laws. They are adhering to Gods righteousness

Hi Pegg, Over the thousands of years, many of GOD's Laws have proven to be acceptable (morally correct) to the inhabitants of the world.
But many others of GOD'S LAWS have been rejected.
Their ideas of what constitutes "righteousness" may not be based upon the principles given by GOD in HIS Holy Scriptures.

Remember, GOD'S LAWS are designed to harmonize one's relationship to one's Creator GOD and to one's neighbor---in LOVE

Secular laws are a mixed bag of reasons.----not all good.

 

[sincerly]

No. You asked about what Paul meant. Paul was looking at a community of Jews in the Jesus sect who objected to the idea of gentiles following Jesus without holding the law (especially being circumcised). He sought to show that those who have the law, the Jews, are not by made better simply by the fact that they know/hear the law. Only doing it matters. That is the entire point of the distinction between doers and hearers. Hearers are Jews, the keepers of the law. But they will be judged by their actions just like anybody else. Which is why doing the law is what matters.

Hi Legion, Yes, "Doing the Scriptures and the Law" is what matters.

The messages which was given so long ago still are valid; however, today's "hearers" are not just Jewish, but people from all nations who choose to open their ears--and then be "doers". It is a choice.

Paul's message was that those personally had not received a "formal giving" of the Laws of GOD, but they in/by their own conscience understood and obeyed the principles which had been proclaimed from Sinai.

 

[metis]

If there is one overriding them in the Tanakh ("O.T."), it's probably that we were rewarded when we obeyed the Law but punished if we didn't. Because of this, one simply cannot make the claim that the giving of the Law was just some sort of warning, especially since it also says the Law is "perpetual", and "forever".

 

[CMike]

What is the purpose of "doing" the Law. Is it as Paul said in Romans that the "doers of the law shall be justified." Or is it an ongoing process of staying out of trouble? Perhaps a way or reconciling to God after sin? Something else? Is there an end purpose?

Your thoughts and insight please.

Whose law?

 

[Ken Brown]

I don't. I beleive the "doing" of the Law is the righteousness that is bestowed upon someone.

Hi Sandy, to be sure, doing the Law and keeping ALL of the commandments, is our righteousness:

Psa 119:172
(172) My tongue shall speak of thy word: for ALL thy commandments are righteousness.

Deu 6:4-5, 17, 24-25
(4) Hear, O Israel: Yahweh our Elohim is one Yahweh:
(5) And thou shalt love Yahweh thy Elohim with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.
(17) Ye shall diligently keep the commandments of Yahweh your Elohim, and his testimonies, and his statutes, which he hath commanded thee.
(24) And Yahweh commanded us to do ALL these statutes, to fear Yahweh our Elohim, for our good always, that he might preserve us alive, as it is at this day.
(25) And it shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do ALL these commandments before Yahweh our Elohim, as he hath commanded us.

So "doing" the Law becomes our righteousness that saves us, and makes it possible to stand before Elohim in judgment:

1Ki 8:32
(32) Then hear thou in heaven, and do, and judge thy servants, condemning the wicked, to bring his way upon his head; and justifying the righteous, to give him according to his righteousness.

And this agrees with Paul when he states that the doers of the Law will be justified or declared righteous:

Rom 2:13
(13) (For not the hearers of the law are just before Elohim, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

And King David:

Psa 15:1-2
(1) A Psalm of David. Yahweh, who shall abide in thy tabernacle? who shall dwell in thy holy hill?
(2) He that walketh uprightly, and worketh righteousness, and speaketh the truth in his heart.

But the real question should be, how does one DO the Law and work righteousness? How does a sinner accomplish the just requirement of the Law, and start "doing" the Law, to where they will be saved? KB

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Whose law?

Mosaic.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

"Without the law" means "non-Jewish".

Ok let's plug that definition in.
"As many as sin non-Jewish will also perish non-Jewish." Sorta changes the meaning methinks.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

No. You asked about what Paul meant. Paul was looking at a community of Jews in the Jesus sect who objected to the idea of gentiles following Jesus without holding the law (especially being circumcised). He sought to show that those who have the law, the Jews, are not by made better simply by the fact that they know/hear the law.

No, I think it's clear that he's speaking about gentiles who do not have the Law but by nature the things contained in the Law. Nowhere in the text of Romans does Paul intimate that he's limiting this view to a select few. Instead he's laying the groundwork for everyone being a sinner Jew as well as gentile.

Therefore my original question still stands. When gentiles do by nature the Law are they conforming to the literal tenets of the Law?

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Originally Posted by Ken Brown It is as Ken stated, when one stands before the White Throne on judgment day one's records will be opened and the "hearers" and the "doers" of the Law will be judged by their abiding/adhering to to the standards of the Law.

I don't believe this. I think Romans shows that we have a choice as to what set of laws we will be judged by. One is the Mosaic Law which Paul states condemns everone or the law of faith which offers justification. Now, since Paul states that the deeds Law justifies no one then what is termed as "the righteousness of the Law" cannot be deeds.

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

No, I think it's clear that he's speaking about gentiles who do not have the Law

Gentiles are defined as those who don't have the law. Possessing the law is what makes one Jewish, but Paul is saying this possession doesn't matter- all that matters is doing it and this holds for everyone.

Therefore my original question still stands. When gentiles do by nature the Law are they conforming to the literal tenets of the Law?

There is only the literal for Paul. He makes no distinction between literal and metaphorical and the "by nature" part is that gentiles, who do not hear/have the law, only follow/obey it by instinct or nature. They can't choose to do it because they don't know what it is. Jews, who have/hear the law can do it but often don't. Whether one hears it or does, all are judged and the only thing that matters is whether one does it.

 

[metis]

I don't believe this. I think Romans shows that we have a choice as to what set of laws we will be judged by. One is the Mosaic Law which Paul states condemns everone or the law of faith which offers justification. Now, since Paul states that the deeds Law justifies no one then what is termed as "the righteousness of the Law" cannot be deeds.

Where in the Torah or Tanakh does it state that the Law "condemns everyone"? Violating a Law may bring punishment, much like a mother or father may punish a disobedient child, but it does not state that we will be "condemned" if we violate a Law, much like a good parent won't condemn their child just because (s)he may misbehave.

Again, to repeat, the Law must be followed as closely as possible if one's Jewish, but if they're not, then they have a choice as to whether to follow the Law. Although, if one does believe that Torah is correct by stating that God gave the Law, and if a gentile believes in God, then maybe they should consider following the Law.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

There is only the literal for Paul. He makes no distinction between literal and metaphorical and the "by nature" part is that gentiles, who do not hear/have the law, only follow/obey it by instinct or nature. They can't choose to do it because they don't know what it is. Jews, who have/hear the law can do it but often don't. Whether one hears it or does, all are judged and the only thing that matters is whether one does it.

So Paul was just goofing around when he said, "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter [refering to the Law 2:27]..." Romans 2:27 KJV

 

[LegionOnomaMoi]

So Paul was just goofing around when he said, "But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter [refering to the Law 2:27]..." Romans 2:27 KJV

That's not Romans 2:27

However, the point of 2:25-29 is to compare circumcision to possessing the law. Physical circumcision doesn't really matter- "For it is not the Jew who is one outwardly who is the Jew, nor is it the outward circumcision, in the flesh, that is circumcision, 29but it is the Jew who is in secret who is the Jew, and who has the circumcision of the heart, in the Spirit, not in letter. That Jew has praise not from human beings, but from God."
The spirit of the law not the letter. Again, the point is the contrast between holding/having the law, which doesn't matter, and the one thing that does- doing/actions.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Where in the Torah or Tanakh does it state that the Law "condemns everyone"? Violating a Law may bring punishment, much like a mother or father may punish a disobedient child, but it does not state that we will be "condemned" if we violate a Law, much like a good parent won't condemn their child just because (s)he may misbehave.

Paul does not get into a specific Law but speaks of the Law in general and clearly states that the Law was given because of sin and as such speaks of all men as sinners.

Again, to repeat, the Law must be followed as closely as possible if one's Jewish, but if they're not, then they have a choice as to whether to follow the Law. Although, if one does believe that Torah is correct by stating that God gave the Law, and if a gentile believes in God, then maybe they should consider following the Law.

We follow a different law.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

That's not Romans 2:27

Yes, my bad.

The spirit of the law not the letter.

Which circles back to my original question to which you studiously never answer.